ArticleReproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E2024
Systematic evaluation of the efficacy of treatments for cesarean scar pregnancy.
Article in Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of the factors associated with initial treatment failure in cesarean scar pregnancy: A retrospective case-control study.Medicine · 2026Article
- Misdiagnosis analysis of uterine scar pregnancy after cesarean section.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2025Article
- From High Risk to Hope: A Case Report of Live Birth from Cesarean Scar Pregnancy with Placenta Percreta.Journal of reproduction & infertilityArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
STUDY
objectiveCesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) is a type of ectopic pregnancy associated with severe complications, including significant hemorrhage, the potential need for hysterectomy, and life-threatening risks. Currently, two classification methods exist for CSP: Vial (type I
methodOur study included 906 patients with CSP from January 2013 to December 2018. The chi-squared test and logistic analysis were used to compare the clinical characteristics. The median and interquartile range (IQR) was calculated. We also analyzed whether preoperative application of methotrexate (MTX) could improve surgical outcomes and the relevant characteristics of misdiagnosed CSP patients.
resultsThere was a significant difference in gestational age, gestational sac diameter, gestational sac width, gestational sac area, remnant myometrial thickness, vaginal bleeding and preoperative hemoglobin levels (p < 0.001) but not in the incidence of residual tissue (p = 0.053). The other factors (intraoperative blood loss, hemoglobin decline, first hemoglobin after operation, total hospital stay, hospital stay after operation, transfusion and duration of catheter drain) were significantly different (p < 0.001). For type I
conclusionFor type I CSP patients, D&E under ultrasound or D&E under hysteroscopy should be recommended. For type III
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.